Namibia's Economy

Namibia is a country that not many people think about. It is a small nation, right above South Africa, that bases most of its economy on tourism and mineral exports. However, it is currently on “junk status” meaning that the country will have to pay more for additional loans. In order to gain an understanding of how Namibia reached this economic low point, we must learn from its history.

Namibia gained independence from South Africa on February 9th, 1990 and since then it has pursued “free market principles, commercial development, and job creation for disadvantaged Namibians”. Because of these goals, Namibia’s economy is heavily dependent on the profits from its main commodity exports: minerals, livestock, and fish. Despite gaining independence from South Africa’s old regime, Namibia’s economy is still intertwined with South Africa. For example, the Namibian dollar is valued at a fixed exchange rate of 1:1 to South Africa’s rand. Because of this, Namibia imports almost all of its goods from South Africa and exports a majority of their goods to South Africa. Namibian leaders have realized that their dependence on South Africa’s economy is precarious and have attempted to diversify their relations. They have been doing this by expanding their market to Europe and embracing the African Growth and Opportunity Act. This act provides “preferential access to American markets for a long list of products”.

Despite these attempts to augment their economy, Namibia has been facing numerous problems, including a recession in 2016. Recently, they have seen their public debt explode from 30% of their GDP to 50% of their GDP. A report titled, Fiscal Risk Statement, by the International Monetary Fund, an organization that works to foster global monetary cooperation, showed the urgency of Namibia’s economic downfall. The IMF pointed out four main risks: “state-owned enterprises, municipalities, the dependency on the South African economy, and the lack of economic reforms”. In response, Namibia has worked with advisors from the IMF to create a new, 3 year, fiscal plan. It is incredibly important that this plan works because Namibia is a stunning country with a beautiful balance of wildlife, beaches, and innovation. When I had the opportunity to visit Namibia, I found that everyday Namibians were truly happy despite having little material wealth.

USA Gymnastics Bankruptcy

As a result of the over “100 lawsuits filed by more than 350 Nassar survivors” and the United States’ Olympic committee’s plants to strip USA gymnastics of its “national governing body” status, USAG has filed for Bankruptcy. USA Gymnastics has been under fire during the past two years due to their attempts to cover up Larry Nassar’s rampant sexual abuse of American Gymnasts. Larry Nassar was a longtime physician for USAG and Michigan State. USAG failed to protect its athletes from Nassar’s action despite being fully aware.

Kathryn Carson, the chairmen of the USAG board, claims, “Our primary reason to do this (file bankruptcy) is to expedite those survivor claims.” Additionally, USAG emphasized that the claims will be paid by USAG’s insurers because the federation does not have the necessary assets. In contrast, John Manly, an attorney for many of the survivors, said “Today’s bankruptcy filing by USA Gymnastics was the inevitable result of the inability of this organization to meet its core responsibility of protecting its athlete members from abuse," This idea is supported by the fact that Michigan Stated took a $500 million settlement in order to move on from the Nassar issue.

The largest repercussion of USAG’s mishandling of the Nassar case and the main reason for filing bankruptcy is that the United States Olympic Committee plans on revoking USAG’s national governing body status. The USOC’s main rationale behind their decision is that a “national governing body must have the capacity and capability to provide the support, protection, and services that we expect for all Olympic athletes in the United States” and that USAG did not achieve these requirements. USAG attempts to appeal this process because their success and revenue are based on the NGB status. Without this status, USAG will be a meaningless organization on an inevitable decline.

USAG is the perfect example of a monopoly. They control all gymnastics competitions (except for NCAA competitions) and the entire certification process within the United States. More specifically, they were an unregulated monopoly. Their marginal costs for running the projects were next to nothing. Yet they were able to charge incredibly high prices because of the high demand for women’s gymnastics. All of this was because the NGB status prohibited anyone else from being a true competitor. Despite this ideal business model, USAG was so corrupt that they jeopardized their NGB status. USAG has acted so immorally and stupidly that they were able to go bankrupt as an unregulated monopoly.

Portugal's Decriminalization of Drugs Part II

The main health effects of the decriminalization of drugs in Portugal were that: the opioid crisis stabilized, there was a dramatic drop in drug use, HIV and Hepatitis infection rates. Specifically, HIV infection went from 104.2 new cases per million in 2000 to 4.2 million cases per million in 2015.

These reductions in violence and health issues, however, were not solely created by the decriminalization of drugs. There was a larger cultural shift that enabled these progressive changes. Specifically, the language regarding addiction changed. People stopped calling drug addicts “drogados” junkies and instead called them “people who use drugs” or “people with addiction disorders”. Additionally, the Official decriminalization of drugs made it much easier for service agencies (health, housing, psychiatry, employment... ) to effectively serve their communities.

You may be wondering, what does the decriminalization of drugs have to do with economics? Specifically, why are you talking about social and medical changes within Portugal? Knowing Portugal’s history with drugs is integral in understanding the economic benefits of the decriminalization of drugs.

Simply, sending drug addicts to rehab is much more cost effective than sending them to prison. This is because initial drug treatment is cheaper than incarceration. The costs related to incarceration are cut when one goes to a rehabilitation center because “people who are in recovery are less likely to commit expensive crimes and be arrested again”. Since the longterm health of an individual will improve if they seek treatment rather than going to prison, the “cost for the healthcare of uninsured patients is drastically reduced”. As a final factor, law enforcement and court costs will be cut because “when crime rates drop fewer arrests occur”.

If 40 percent of addicted offenders, in the United States, received treatment “there would be an estimated savings of $12.9 billion USD”. The most important comparison of the economic benefits of rehabilitating drug addicts is that the price of a three-month stint in rehab only costs $5,000. In comparison imprisoning an inmate for one year costs taxpayers an average of $31,000 per year. This is compounded by the fact that an average sentence for drug possession is 3 years. Overall, it is economically and socially more beneficial to decriminalize and reallocate spending into rehabilitation centers rather than punitive prisons.

https://www.dualdiagnosis.org/drug-rehab-instead-of-prison-could-save-billions-says-report-2/

Portugal’s Decriminalization of Drugs Part I

During the 1980s, Portugal had a national drug problem where robberies and muggings were rampant. At the start of 1980, there was an influx of heroin in the once quiet fishing town of Olhao, Portugal. This influx made Olhao one of the top drug capitals in Europe. Because of this 1 in 100 Portuguese citizens began dealing with heroin addiction and the HIV infection rate became the highest in Europe.

Simply, Portugal was unprepared for the influx of marijuana and heroin. They had previously been ruled under Antonio Salazar’s oppressive regime. This government prohibited education and implemented stringent rules. This meant that the average citizen was uneducated and oppressed. Once they shifted towards an open economy, Portuguese residents had access to all the goods they could imagine, including drugs. The lack of education lead thousands of people to use heroin.

In an attempt to reduce crime, the new Portuguese government decriminalized all drugs in 2001. Instead of being arrested, an individual who is caught possessing drugs will have multiple options. They can be fined, given a warning, or go to a local “commission”. At a commission a doctor, lawyer, and social worker talks to the addict about “treatment, harm reduction, and support services that are available to them”. These actions are based on Portugal's three tenets regarding drug addiction. The first tenet is that “there’s no such thing as a soft or hard drug, only healthy and unhealthy relationships with drugs”. The second idea is that “an individual’s unhealthy relationship with drugs often conceals frayed relationships with loved ones, with the world around them, and with themselves”. The final tenet is that “the eradication of all drugs is an impossible goal”.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it

The Samaritan's Dilemma

The Samaritan’s Dilemma is an economic concept that has wide-ranging consequences for today’s society. It deals with the economics of philanthropy and donation, and comments on the human nature’s potential to fall into patterns. The Samaritan’s Dilemma is highly related to the moral hazard problem. Adrienne Mitchell wrote a great article that relates moral hazard to senioritis, check it out below.

The Samaritan’s Dilemma is always present when giving need; that is, every time philanthropy or donation occurs to address a need, there is the possibility that it will incur more need. An example of this in a non economic sense is when you give a child candy once, they will ask for more candy. It is more of a psychological concept than an economic one, but because economics is really the study of human behavior there is a great deal of overlap between the two. The Samaritan’s Dilemma as it pertains to economics only occurs when the condition of being in need is in some way controlled by the individual who requires aid. For example, and this is purely theoretical, say there’s a homeless person who can control their homelessness, or at least influence it. They could get a job, but because of the help they get in their present state, they don’t do so, generating more need long-term than if the donor had not given aid in the first place. The Samaritan’s Dilemma is basically weighing the short term benefits of helping against the long-term cost of helping.

The Samaritan’s Dilemma also leads to perverse incentive issues, where instead of inaction, negative action is taken in order to receive aid. This occurs, say, when welfare is income based. If a recipient of welfare understood that the less income they have the more welfare they get, they may be motivated to take the second option, as it means less work for them. The help given has now incentivized against working harder to escape poverty, instead causing a rise in the number of those in need and the degree of their need.

If this is true for almost all philanthropy, how can any donation be effective? The answer is that there is no way to tell for sure, but steps can be taken to ensure that the dilemma has as little effect as possible. One of these steps is private donation. If there is no organizational middleman, that is, if the individual donating has control over how the resources are used, then the Samaritan’s Dilemma can be reduced. Because they are the ones controlling the money, the private donors would be incentivized to make sure that the money is effectively used and not abused for the short-term benefit.

The existence of the Samaritan’s Dilemma does not mean you should stop donating. There are many situations where the condition of need is outside the individual’s control, like the recent wildfires in California. For the people who lost their homes and belongings, it was not by choice. Donating for their benefit will not cause long-term costs, and the Samaritan’s Dilemma does not exist. For donation to other causes, however, you should keep the Samaritan’s Dilemma in mind when you donate. If possible, donate to an organization or individual who you know to be strict about their usage of funds. Philanthropy is an important way to give back, but we should be economically smart about it.

https://fee.org/articles/the-samaritans-dilemma-and-the-welfare-state/

The Tragedy of the Anticommons

I previously blogged about the Tragedy of Commons, and this is a follow up to that post. Briefly put, the tragedy of commons occurs when a common resource is overused. The solution to the tragedy of commons depends on the situation, but the most common is to privatize the property. This usually works, with resources like water being controlled by private companies. However, in certain situations issues with this solution will arise. If there are too many private owners of a resource, each owner can block the other’s use. This phenomenon of common resource underuse was first called the tragedy of the anticommons by Michael Heller, law professor at Columbia University.

The Tragedy of the Anticommons occurs when there are too many private owners of a resource, allowing individual owners to block access to other owners. An example Heller uses is of patents. If 50 people own a patent relating to resources used to create a product, each of them can block access to the resource. As a result, the product isn’t going to be produced AND the resources aren’t being utilized to their maximum efficiency. This underuse of resource is rooted in the social and economic system of the United States. The United States was founded on freedom, and economic freedom is a fiercely protected right. But with such heavy emphasis on private property and individual ownership rights comes the risk of the anticommons. Other examples Heller uses are technology, biomedical research, broadcast spectrum ownership, and even the music industry. All of these industries have a high risk of the anticommons tragedy, because of the wide ownership of key resources needed to produce the goods in those industries.

So, why don’t we learn about the tragedy of anticommons when we learn the tragedy of the commons? The answer is in two parts. One, the tragedy of anticommons is a relatively recent concept, with Heller’s research being published in 2010 compared to our textbook’s publication in 2005. The second part is more alarming. The tragedy of the anticommons is a hidden phenomenon, invisible until identified. It’s not an issue that builds in severity until dealt with, it’s one that is found or not found, and only once it’s found can it be dealt with. This is because opportunity costs are not visible, and the tragedy of the anticommons is essentially what happens when the opportunity costs of not producing. For example, nobody knows about that the anticommons blocked a new drug from being produced for the very reason that it was not produced. As Heller puts it, “Innovators don’t advertise the lifesaving cures they abandon”.

With that in mind, researchers found that the underuse associated with the tragedy of anticommons is more likely to occur than the tragedy of commons, and that fact, coupled with the invisibility of the tragedy of anticommons, makes this phenomenon very harmful to society. If we can’t identify that we’re underusing resources, we can’t fix the inefficiency and society suffers. In Heller’s words, the tragedy of the anticommons “wrecks markets, stops innovation, and costs lives. Our society needs to shift in order to understand the consequences of too much private ownership to address the growing issue of the tragedy of the anticommons.

http://wealthofthecommons.org/essay/tragedy-anticommons

Economics of College Applications (sorry if triggering at this time)

College tuition is not the only high expense related to college. Paying to even just apply to colleges has become crazy expensive. Over the years more and more applicants have been applying to colleges meaning more rejections, but that also means more and more students pay to apply with higher chances of getting rejected. Let's look at Harvard for example. Harvard got about 35,000 applications last year and with an application fee of $75 they made about 2.6 million just from fees. Students end up spending hundreds of dollars on application fees which are basically a fixed cost. The average application fee is $37.88 and let's say you apply to 10 schools; that would cost about $380! The average application fee is the highest it has been in 5 years and I am not surprised. With the increase in the number of students applying to colleges and in the number of colleges, universities have bumped up the prices to apply to gain even more profit. Most families say that the costs to apply are worth it and I agree, you want to keep options open to further your education. But why are there even application fees at all? If you do not end up attending the school why should you have to pay them any money at all? These are questions that do not have reasonable answers but either way, it is important to at least keep in mind how much you end up spending on applications alone.

Opportunity Cost of Tardiness

Everyone has been late to school before, but there are many opportunity costs that people ignore. A clear advantage is that you get more time to rest. Different people value this at different importance levels. Nevertheless, getting more rest is an opportunity cost one has to sacrifice for being on time to school. However, there are several costs that build up as more tardies are accumulated. The first thing is getting mailed warnings to parents, who are likely not going to be happy. The next punishment is a meeting with a school administrator, and then having to attend Saturday School. Finally, after all of that, there is the possibility of being transferred to an alternate school. The opportunity cost of being tardy is not having to worry about all of these.

The Pink Tax

     The pink tax is a phenomenon where products marketed toward girls and women are more expensive than the same products targeted for men and boys.  This applies to all sorts of products: dry cleaning, hygiene products, clothing, and even canes.  It has been found that on average, women pay more than men 42 percent of the time, which adds up to thousands of dollars per year.  Additionally, women already make only about three-quarters of what men make, so they have less income to begin with.  This is a regressive measure because it more heavily burdens the group that has less income.
     The pink tax is seen as a form of price discrimination.  Price discrimination is charging consumers as much as they are willing to pay for an item.  The pink tax is clearly an example of price discrimination because it gives women who are willing the opportunity to pay more for their goods.  In a grocery store, when the same product is packaged in pink and black, those who are willing to pay more for pink have the opportunity to do so.  Though this may seem ridiculous that pink costs more, it makes economic sense for companies if consumers are willing to pay it, which many are.  Oftentimes, women don't know that they are actually being charged more, but nevertheless, their participation in price discrimination allows it to continue. 

Works Cited:
https://www.listenmoneymatters.com/the-pink-tax/

Opportunity Cost of School Sports

 Opportunity Cost is an economic term can be applied to everyday life. Opportunity cost is the loss of potential benefit if one choice is chosen above another. One way this can be used is in school, specifically school sports. Some benefits of doing school sports are that it helps create friendships, you get exercise, experiencing the thrill of competition, and depending on your view, skipping school on some days and not taking PE class for a year. Therefore, choosing not to do school sports has the opportunity cost of everything listed in the previous sentence.
 However, choosing to do school sports also has opportunity costs. Skipping school can be considered as a cost too because of the tests and assignments you have to make up. You could also miss review days or lectures. Furthermore, choosing to do some school sports limits your competition to a few schools. For athletes who are nationally ranked in tennis, for example, electing to NOT participate on the school team could actually be more beneficial because of the opportunity costs. Instead of devoting time to play students from local schools and practicing with students from only the same school they attend, they could travel to other places and participate in tournaments and practice with whoever will optimize their improvement. This could be more valuable than the cost of taking an extra class.

Economics of School Attendance

     When the fires compromised the air quality a couple weeks ago, our school was canceled for a day. I recall someone mentioning the school district facing a loss due to no attendance that day. I previously heard that public schools get paid for the attendance of their students. After some additional research, I discovered that California spends an average of $11,000 per student each year. With a district of 4,300 students shutting down even for a day, the district suddenly loses quite a bit of revenue. 
    Students often complain about not having certain days of school off. However, when we consider the impact of missing days of schools, we can see the financial incentive to have as much student attendance as possible. While we see a 3 day weekend as a chance to relax, the district has to face some heavy losses.
    This can be further related to the emphasis on attendance at our school. If you are constantly absent, you will receive punishments such as Saturday school. These are to incentivize someone to show up to class, as they would not want to face such punishment. In college, for the most part, no one cares whether or not you actually go to class or not. This is because the school already has been paid, and is not going to directly benefit from you being in class.
    It's interesting to see so much economics behind matters like school attendance. After taking this into consideration, I will definitely appreciate our days off more, as the school is sacrificing a massive opportunity cost in order to satisfy us, students.
     

The Economics of Santa Claus

As December is just around the corner, there's only one thing on my mind. Christmas. And with that comes another year of unanswerable questions about the man, the myth, the legend himself, Santa Claus. I’ve left out cookies and milk every year since I was little and somehow when I wake up Christmas morning, they've magically disappeared and there would be big presents perfectly wrapped under my tree. I was fascinated. As I got older, I started to question this process. I began to become more and more flustered every Christmas morning. There was one question that kept popping into my mind. Is Santa Claus real...ly paying for all of these presents? I was so curious on how he got the money and funding to pay for every kid in the world that celebrates Christmas, so I did some research.

With 1.9 billion kids in the world, that means Santa Claus is paying about $610 billion on toys alone. Keep in mind he also has to keep his sleigh repaired and has other costs, so who knows what the total cost becomes. To make sure his sleigh can travel around the world in one night, he has to make sure his energy source (whatever that is) can exert 9.3 million Megawatts. That's just enough energy to travel the world at 60 miles a second! You also have to consider where you would store 1.9 billion presents for a full year. You have to find a rental locker that can hold 8.6 million acres worth of presents, which is probably really hard to find! So this must get you thinking, how can Santa afford all of these?

Coca-Cola spends $3.3 billion each year on advertising, and if you’ve ever seen their Christmas ads, you know Santa is a big part of their holiday campaign. So this got me thinking, maybe Santa Claus uses endorsements to pay off these insane debts, especially his big ones like Coca-Cola. This would explain his frequent appearances in their commercials and explain how he could be putting a dent in those costs he has to pay. From Coca-Cola’s perspective, the potential loss of income for their company without Santa’s brand would make him worth a big paycheck, helping him pay off these extreme prices he has to pay.

Opportunity Cost in Fantasy Football

As we learned in class, an opportunity cost is the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen. We may not realize it, but this concept applies to a lot of daily activities we do. I realized that this specific concept is used a lot in one of my favorite weekly activities, fantasy football. For those who don’t know, fantasy football is a virtual ownership of a fantasy team composed of players from different NFL teams. Each owner drafts players to create their own unique roster. The players then earn points for their owner based on their performance in the live games each week. Owners play head to head matchups with other teams in the league every week and whoever gets the most combined points by the end of the week, wins.

Opportunity cost plays a big part in winning your matchups. Every week you are faced with lineup and roster decisions. In fantasy football, you are only allowed to start a certain amount of players. In most leagues, it’s one quarterback, two running backs, two wide receivers, one flex (wide receiver or running back), one kicker, and one defense. Although it’s only a 9 man roster, you can still have players on your bench. So every week you have to look at a players matchup and decide if he will be the best start for your team. For example, if one of your best running backs is going up against the best defense in the league, you have some risks to take.  The best running back versus the best defense may mean a high scoring game, or it may mean that your running back will get very few points. This is where opportunity cost plays a big part in your decision making. You have to figure out the opportunity cost of starting a certain player over another to see what the best decision for your team is.

As you are the owner of this team, you become very involved.  You will find yourself doing weird things like scouting players of the opposing team's defense and finding out small details like forced fumble average to make sure you're running back won't fumble that week.  Doing your research and finding out the opportunity cost every week is essential to building a solid team.  Although for some people with no hope of winning the championship (Kyle), it is better to just wait until the next year to start fresh.

College vs. Trade School

We all know that college is expensive. The average bachelors degree in the United States costs over $127,000. This, in addition to living costs, means that 70% of students end up taking out student loans to cover the cost. Also, spending four years in school means four years not having a steady income.  College is the seen as the default path after high school, and while it you will make more money with a bachelors degree than just a high school diploma, is college actually the best option considered the cost?

Going to a four-year school isn't the only way to make money. Going trade school, which is a school that teaches a specific skill, like how to be mechanic or an electrician, can be pretty lucrative while not having the same costs as regular university. The average trade school degree cost $33,000, almost $100,000 less than a bachelors degree. The time is takes to get a trade school degree is also significantly less.

Technical jobs have a median salary of $35,500, while people with degree make on average $46,000. If you take into account student loans, tuition, college housing, and getting into the job market faster, trade school may be more financially wise in the long run. Also, because it's not really possible to replace your plumber with robot or someone oversees, the job security is much higher. Technical work is in high demand; not everyone will need to hire a computer programmer, but almost everyone will need a mechanic sometime in their life.

While trade school is often overlooked, its definitely not for everyone. While you can make a decent salary in a technical job, someone with a regular degree will, on average, make more money. Also, trade work is more dangerous. Climbing roof or handling live wires is a risk that not everyone is willing to take.

Blue-collar work isn't something that many people dream of, but it can be a smart decision for some. There are pros and cons for college and trade school, but some people just aren't cut out for college and vice versa. While it may not be right for everyone, trade school should be presented as an alternative option.

Work Citied:
https://www.thesimpledollar.com/why-you-should-consider-trade-school-instead-of-college/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryancraig/2018/06/14/blue-collar-trade-jobs-are-dangerous-but-not-for-the-reason-you-think/#75704444c639
https://lifehacker.com/trade-school-might-be-a-better-choice-than-college-her-1484086007

How gyms stay in business

    Anyone who has tried to buy their own gym equipment knows how expensive it is upfront and the maintenance is also quite costly, so looking at large gyms that have dozens of these machines it is hard to imagine how they stay in business. The success of gyms mostly has to do with the large market they serve and how little the consumers actually use the product they buy. In fact, only eighteen percent of gym membership holders use the gym regularly.
     The other eighty-two percent of gym membership holders mostly subscribe as a result of New Year's Resolutions and the appeal of the idea of going to the gym. This means that they will sign up for plans and then the gym will use an automatic billing system to continue collecting money from the members without them remembering to unsubscribe.

                                                      
      Gyms know about this habit of people to sign up and forget about memberships so they will often allow many more people to sign up for memberships than the gym has capacity for. For example, most Planet Fitness gyms can only hold about three hundred people at a time but they each have around six thousand five hundred members. These extra members are pure profit for the company because they don't contribute to the wear and tear of the equipment and they don't use the other amenities like showers that the gym provides. So, despite the high upfront costs of owning a gym, the human behavior of most gym customers is what allows them to stay in business and turn such a large profit.

Sources
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/05/23/exorcise-your-ghosts-of-spending-past.aspx

Economics of Procrastination

Procrastination is something that we all do in one form or another. Personally, I am currently procrastinating on my blog assignment, college apps, and an English essay. While procrastination may seem to be counterproductive on the surface, its benefits can be uncovered through analysis from the perspective of economics.

Many people derive utility from the act of procrastinating, even if they do not realize it. The decision to procrastinate comes down to opportunity cost. For example, the opportunity cost of spending time on homework now is the time that could be spent watching Netflix or playing games. Obviously the work must be done at some point in the future, however the instant gratification of wasting time now often outweighs the stress induced by putting work off.

People often justify procrastination through statements such as "I'll be more focused later" or "I just need a quick break." It may seem that these are just weak attempts at rationalizing time-wasting activities, however they are not without some truth. Deadlines have been shown to greatly improve productivity, and procrastination may actually reduce total time wasted. If one spends 3 hours at maximum focus working up to the deadline on an essay after procrastinating on it, they will have wasted less time than if they spent 5 hours working interspersed with distractions.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2008/05/how-economists-think-about-procrastination.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/12/30/procrastination.economics/

Economic Benefits of Trade School

              The typical educational path for people in the United States is to go from high school to a traditional four-year college or to a community college and then a transfer to a traditional four-year college. This path may not be the best economic choice for every student, depending on the type of career they wish to pursue trade school may be the best option.
              Trade school is a quick way for people to enter the workforce with most courses taking between six week and two years. These quick courses can provide students with the opportunity to make above minimum wage to help pay for college or start earning a good salary sooner than those who chose to take the traditional college path. In fact, these courses offer people a pathway into many fields including, stem, household maintenance, and other office jobs. For example, Phlebotomy (people who draw blood) can make between twenty-five to thirty dollars an hour and the course to get certified is only six weeks long. Eventually, people who have graduated from vocational school can earn close to one hundred thousand dollars, which is similar to what people who have graduated from a four-year college earn because they can occupy the same jobs.
             Additionally, there is a high demand for people who have graduated from vocational school. This means that there are currently more scholarships for people going to these schools, reducing the amount of debt that people graduate from school with. Compared to a four-year college trade school can total thirty-three thousand dollars to complete whereas traditional college can cost upwards of two hundred thousand dollars for tuition alone, meaning that they will graduate with much more debt. This helps to eliminate the income inequality generated by these different types of schools because instead of paying thousands of dollars to the bank per month they can use all of their salaries for their own personal gain. This high demand for vocational workers also means that there are lower unemployment rates for graduates from trade school, providing job security to people in these positions. So, while trade school is not appropriate for every student it may be the best option for those looking for an alternative education path.

Sources
https://careerschoolnow.org/careers/trade-school-vs-traditional-college

Opportunity Cost of Homeschooling

Homeschooling is a trend thats growing in the United States. Many parents are choosing to teach their child at home instead of sending them to regular school. It's considered an improvement by some. Children get one-on-one lessons instead of being lost among a classroom of thirty students. Also, when adding up all the cost of sending your child to school, even public school, homeschooling can seem cheaper. However, many people don't realize there is a significant opportunity cost of homeschooling.

The most impactful is the loss of income. At least one parent has to say home everyday to teaching their kids, and it's a big commitment. Any parent that decides to homeschool their child will probably need to quit their job, meaning they will be giving up however much money they make. Making less money may also result in having to adopt a more economic lifestyle, which can be stressful. Whatever cost you associate with happiness may also go up.

The cost of sacrificing time to teach your children yourself instead of sending them to public school can also extend to personal opportunity cost. Having no time to yourself can be a mental burden, and whatever you have to do or buy to make that up is also an opportunity cost.

This makes homeschooling sound pretty bad, but if you think it about there could be similar opportunity costs to sending kids to regular school. The important thing is what you'll have to sacrifice in terms of an income. Though I doubt anyone reading this will be thinking about homeschooling vs regular schooling anytime soon, is homeschooling worth it in terms of opportunity cost?

Work Citied:
http://www.homeeddirectory.com/articles/1_feb10
https://www.wahm.com/articles/the-cost-burdens-of-homeschooling.html
https://millennialmoneyman.com/cost-of-homeschooling/

Review of Spillover Cost and Benefits

In Chapter 30 we are introduced to the topic of spillovers. Spillovers, which can also be called externalities, are defined as either the cost or benefit accruing to a third party that is external to a market transaction. An example would be if you decided to play loud music in the middle of the night, the negative externality may be that your neighbor can no longer fall back asleep. There are also such things as spillover costs and benefits. Spillover costs are when there is an overproduction of a product and an over allocation of resources to this product (wasted resources on producing too much of a good). Spillover benefits are the exact opposite of this, there is an underproduction and an underallocation of resources. One key difference in the graphs between a spillover benefit and a spillover cost curve is the equilibrium output. In a cost curve the equilibrium output is greater than the optimal output, while in a benefit curve the equilibrium is less than the optimal output. I’ve attached below the graphs for both a spillover cost and a spillover benefit curve:

Spillover Benefit:

Spillover Cost:

Cultural Singularity: Losing Innovation in Silicon Valley

Silicon Valley. We’re known by the world for being a tech hub that is constantly stimulated by ideas, creativity, and innovation. We’re known for “thinking different”, thanks to Steve Jobs. In our coffee driven culture that ensues productivity, this is civilization that we promote. We’re not laid back, we constantly work—propelled and sustained by our caffeine. A few byproducts, or negative externalities, of course include mental health symptoms and anxiety, as well as tech workers causing displacement through gentrification.

We’re especially known for all of this, because we’re struggling to find a balance between consumption and production. And the ones to blame are the looming monopoly and oligopoly tech giants. They are part of the problem of why we are finding it so difficult to separate from our lives: from personal assistants of Siri to storing our memories through photos, documents, and other files to becoming stuck down an internet rabbit hole through the endless scrolling of social media and limitless clicking of recommendations on youtube. They are effectively made by tech giants to be dominating and addictive.

As we learned about the Disney and Universal in the “In media universe, the force is strongest with Disney, Universal” Article, parallel exclusion is when two companies dominate an industry and collude to keep barriers of entries high in order to exclude future businesses to compete, making it difficult to jump into the market and deter start ups. This targeting of their competitors discourages innovation. From tablets to smartphones, Samsung, Google, and Apple manages to maintain the oligopolistic market with their high production costs, economies of scale, and ownership of raw materials.

It is individuality and diverse thinking that led to the rise of Silicon Valley, let’s reclaim our iconic culture back.